China’s GDP is not rising at a rate of 6.5 percent. It is most likely growing at a rate of less than half that. Of course, not everyone agrees that the rate is that low, but there is still a disagreement regarding what is really going on in China’s economy and if the country’s claimed GDP growth is realistic.
The gap between official data and views on the ground is the source of considerable distrust. China’s economic growth exceeded 6.5 percent in every quarter last year, according to the National Bureau of Statistics. While this is a far cry from the astronomical growth rates China has seen for the better part of the last four decades, it is still a very fast pace of growth by most standards.
However, when speaking with Chinese entrepreneurs, economists, or analysts, it is difficult to locate any economic sector that is growing at a healthy rate. Almost everyone is bemoaning the dire circumstances, growing bankruptcies, a falling stock market, and shattered aspirations. I have never witnessed such a high degree of financial anxiety and misery in my eighteen years in China.
These worries have even made their way into academics. One of my students told me the other day that there was a significant increase in the number of students selling their items on the university website last semester because they were short on funds. They’re selling their cellphones, computers, clothes, and a variety of other items. He claims that sales are up significantly from last year, to the point where everyone is talking about it. He also mentioned that this appears to be happening at other schools. Poor and middle-class children appear to be strapped for cash since they receive far less money from their parents than in the past.
This isn’t what you’d expect to hear from a country with an annual growth rate of over 6.5 percent. So, what exactly does it imply to state that China’s GDP is increasing at that rate? It turns out that there are three distinct sets of issues that affect the interpretation of China’s GDP growth data. Analysts must distinguish between these three difficulties and avoid causing confusion by mixing them.
What Does GDP Measure?
The first set of issues has to do with the definition of GDP. This problem impacts not only China, but also the rest of the world. This is especially true in advanced economies with significant technology and service industries that use technology whose worth may be significantly undervalued due to the inability to precisely count it.
The generation of actual economic value is often thought to be measured by GDP. If a country’s GDP increases by 5% in a year, for example, this is understood to suggest that the amount of wealth produced in the previous year was 5% higher. In other words, the country’s ability to service debt would be assumed to have improved by 5%, which is approximately the same thing.
However, because GDP is only a proxy for whatever it is supposed to measure, there is no method to genuinely quantify a country’s creation of real economic value. Economists have agreed on which measurements should be used to calculate GDP, and the total is referred to as a country’s aggregate GDP, or the worth of everything produced locally in that economy.
Of course, when GDP is calculated, not all value-creating activities are taken into account. For example, if you teach your friend Spanish for free, you contribute to the economy’s prosperity but not to GDP. In contrast, if he pays you, the country’s GDP rises by the amount you are paid, despite the fact that you bring the same amount of value to the economy whether he pays you or not. Furthermore, not every measured activity generates value: for example, building a bridge to nowhere generates the same boost in GDP as building a much-needed bridge.
Of course, no economic value proxy is flawless, but there are legitimate concerns about whether GDP is flawed to the point of being useless as a proxy. Is GDP truly capable of capturing all of an economy’s value creation? While this is a severe problem in any country, it may be much more so in China due to the large amount of nonproductive investment that is counted in China’s GDP numbers despite the fact that this investment does not add to the country’s wealth or debt-servicing capacity.
How Accurate Are China’s GDP Statistics?
The second set of issues revolves around how meticulously and accurately Chinese statisticians at the National Bureau of Statistics calculate the agreed-upon variables that go into calculating GDP. Do they tend to collect data in a way that causes consistently biased errors (upward, to indicate higher than actual GDP, I presume)? Or are they lying to appease their political superiors?
I’m pretty confident China’s economic data is skewed in ways that smooth out volatility, but I presume the National Bureau of Statistics has followed generally accepted methods for calculating GDP more or less correctly, at least until lately. However, I am not confident in my assumption: as I previously stated, it is difficult to find any area of the Chinese economy that is acting as one would expect a country developing at a rate of more than 6.5 percent to behave. Furthermore, it has proven difficult to reconcile various economic indicators with GDP estimates, particularly in recent years. (See, for example, this piece by economists Bob Barbera and Yinghao Hu of Johns Hopkins University, which itself relates to a satellite imaging study.)
Furthermore, experts whose work I admire, such as Anne Stevenson-Yang of J Capital, appear to be skeptical of the data, arguing that China’s actual growth rate is substantially lower than the published figures, owing to data falsification at some point during the gathering process. But, whatever the situation may be, if there is a significant difference between what statisticians actually measure and what they claim to measure, predicting how long the overstatement will last and how big of an adjustment it will finally undergo is extremely difficult.
Is GDP Measured as an Output or an Input?
The final set of GDP issues only happens in a small number of circumstances around the world (today, China is the main example). However, the ramifications are far more serious. This is about whether GDP is used as a proxy for economic activity at all. In China, reported GDP does not inform observers about the economy’s performance; rather, it informs them about how quickly Beijing believes it will be able to make the required changes to the Chinese economy. This is due to the fact that GDP in China is defined differently than it is in most other large economies.
GDP is supposed to be a measure of output in any economic system, and that is exactly what it measures in most countries, however clumsily. In other words, the economy does what it does, and statisticians measure the things economists agree to include in relevant calculations at the end of a certain time period, and then characterize the change over time as the size of GDP growth for that period.
This is not the case in China, where GDP is used as an input to establish the country’s yearly GDP growth objective. The growth objective for a certain time period is set well in advance, and in order to meet it, numerous organizations, including local governments, participate in the necessary amount of activity, which is frequently financed by debt. Beijing can accomplish any growth objective it wants as long as it has financial capacity and can postpone the write-down of nonproductive assets.
However, this structure alters the definition of GDP. In China, reported GDP is no longer a measure of economic growth but rather of political intent. As any systems theorist knows, input data tells you nothing about a system’s performance. As a result, when analysts examine what reported GDP means for the health of the Chinese economy, they are making a fundamental error in systems theory: a systems input can only provide information about the operators’ aims, never about the system’s performance.
In practice, this implies that once Beijing sets a GDP growth target, local governments should be able to generate enough economic activity to meet that target, and they should be permitted to borrow as much as they need to do so. There would be no problem if this activity was productive, however it would be an astounding coincidence (or genuinely incredible feat of prognostication) if the amount of productive activity truly equaled the growth target. In that case, GDP growth would be more likely to continuously surpass the objective, which is exactly what happened until roughly a decade ago.
However, if economic activity isn’t productive, China can set GDP growth as a system input in a way that other countries can’t. To begin with, there must be no firm budget constraints, allowing economic organizations to continue destroying value year after year. Second, the bad debt that results cannot be canceled off. Once these two prerequisites are met which they are in China Beijing may set whatever growth target it wants and accomplish it as long as it has the required debt capacity.
However, note that meeting the objective says nothing about the country’s real economic growth, which GDP is supposed to be a proxy for (however imperfectly). GDP growth, once it becomes a system input rather than an output, is no longer a reliable indicator of the economy’s health or performance.
Conclusion
The debate over China’s economic growth rate and its relationship to GDP is unlikely to come to a conclusion this year. Observers have come to the conclusion that China’s economy is not as strong as the GDP data portrays. And I suspect that only a few of the most resolutely mainstream economists (and, strangely enough, this is more likely to be foreign than Chinese economists) still believe that China’s economy is as healthy and brisk as one might expect from a country whose GDP is growing at 6.5 percent and is expected to grow by more than 6 percent next year.
The issues affecting the Chinese economy, as well as the concerns articulated by Chinese authorities, are so severe that it takes little imagination to realize that recorded GDP in China does not correspond to what we assume it reflects abroad. However, some economists have failed to grasp the ramifications, and they frequently refuse to alter their techniques to account for the aforementioned issues with China’s reported GDP numbers. For example, I just read a paper authored by an economist that explored the consequences of China having the world’s largest PPP-adjusted GDP.
Any observer dubious of the relationship between the Chinese economy and its stated GDP, on the other hand, must dismiss the PPP-adjustment as utter folly. (I don’t mean that the PPP-adjusted statistics for China is less accurate than for other nations; I mean that it is nearly pure garbage.) Any ratio based on reported GDP figures can only be comparable to analogous numbers in other countries if China’s reported GDP numbers have the same link to the underlying economyor whatever GDP is considered to imply. But it’s doubtful that many people still believe that.
The argument is that if there is a mismatch between China’s reported GDP estimates and the underlying economy, there are at least three distinct ways for this discrepancy to express itself. Observers, on the other hand, frequently mix up the three. For example, I have stated numerous times that I believe China’s GDP would increase at less than half the present reported rate if expressed in a comparable manner with that of other countries.
Many people take this to suggest that I believe Beijing is misrepresenting data, but that is not the case. The largest issue, in my opinion, is that China’s declared GDP is an input into the economic system rather than a measurable product. The input statistics would have to be updated with some meaningful output, such as the amount of bad debt that should be (but isn’t) written down in a specific time period, to make China’s GDP figures comparable to those of other countries. If this sum was deducted from China’s nominal GDP growth rate, the resulting adjusted growth rate would most likely be far closer to what economists consider GDP than the country’s actual reported GDP numbers.
The sentence in the original version of this page was incorrect “Furthermore, not all measured activity provides value: for example, constructing would produce the same boost in GDP as constructing a much-needed bridge.” The expression “The phrase “building a bridge to nowhere” was unintentionally deleted during the process of uploading the piece to the website, but it has since been restored.
What will China’s GDP be in 2021?
According to GDP statistics from 2021, China’s most productive provinces and cities are listed below. According to the National Bureau of Statistics, China’s GDP in 2021 was RMB 114.4 trillion (US$17.7 trillion), up around RMB 13 trillion (US$3 trillion) from 2020, or 8.1 percent year-on-year growth (NBS).
What does China’s GDP mean?
China’s economic growth is being measured. Before attempting to define “high quality” growth, it’s important to first understand what GDPmeasure China’s of economic production and growthmeans.
China’s Economy Prior to Reforms
Prior to 1979, China had a centrally planned, or command, economy under Chairman Mao Zedong’s direction. The state directed and controlled a substantial portion of the country’s economic output, setting production objectives, controlling prices, and allocating resources across the sector. All of China’s individual household farms were collectivized into big communes in the 1950s. During the 1960s and 1970s, the central government made large-scale expenditures in physical and human capital to promote rapid industrialization. As a result, by 1978, over three-quarters of industrial output was produced by centrally controlled, state-owned enterprises (SOEs), with output targets set centrally. Private businesses and foreign-owned businesses were typically prohibited. The Chinese government’s main goal was to make China’s economy largely self-sufficient. In general, foreign trade was confined to obtaining items that could not be manufactured or obtained in China. The economy was distorted as a result of such practices. There were few incentives for firms, workers, and farmers to become more productive or concerned about the quality of what they produced because most aspects of the economy were managed and run by the central government. As a result, there were no market mechanisms to efficiently allocate resources, and thus there were few incentives for firms, workers, and farmers to become more productive or concerned about the quality of what they produced (since they were mainly focused on production goals set by the government).
China’s real GDP grew at an average annual rate of 6.7 percent from 1953 to 1978, according to Chinese government statistics, though the accuracy of these figures has been questioned by many analysts, who contend that Chinese government officials (especially at the subnational levels) often exaggerated production levels for a variety of political reasons during this time. China’s actual average yearly real GDP growth during this period, according to economist Angus Maddison, was around 4.4 percent. 5 Furthermore, China’s economy experienced significant downturns under Chairman Mao Zedong’s leadership, including during the Great Leap Forward from 1958 to 1962 (which resulted in a massive famine and the deaths of up to 45 million people)6 and the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976 (which resulted in a massive famine and the deaths of up to 45 million people) (which caused widespread political chaos and greatly disrupted the economy). China’s per capita GDP doubled between 1950 and 1978 on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis,7 a typical indicator of a country’s living standards. However, Chinese living standards declined by 20.3 percent between 1958 and 1962, and by 9.6 percent between 1966 and 1968. (see Figure 1). Furthermore, as seen in Figure 2, the rise in Chinese living standards paled in contrast to those in the West, such as Japan.
The Chinese government decided to break with its Soviet-style economic policies in 1978 (shortly after Chairman Mao’s death in 1976) by gradually reforming the economy according to free market principles and opening up trade and investment with the West, in the hopes of significantly increasing economic growth and raising living standards. “Black cat, white cat, what does it matter what color the cat is as long as it catches mice?” said Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, the architect of China’s economic reforms. 8
The Introduction of Economic Reforms
China started a series of economic reforms in 1979. Farmers were given price and ownership incentives by the central government, allowing them to sell a portion of their harvests on the open market. Furthermore, the government developed four special economic zones along the coast to attract international investment, increase exports, and import high-tech products into China. Additional reforms, implemented in stages, aimed to decentralize economic policymaking in a number of areas, including trade. Provincial and municipal governments were given economic control of diverse firms, and they were generally allowed to operate and compete on free market principles rather than under the direction and guidance of state planning. Citizens were also encouraged to create their own enterprises. More coastal cities and regions have been classified as open cities and development zones, allowing them to experiment with free-market reforms and give tax and trade advantages to attract international investment. Furthermore, state pricing controls on a variety of products were gradually phased off. China’s economic growth was also aided by trade liberalization. Trade obstacles were removed, allowing for more competitiveness and FDI inflows. China’s incremental economic reforms aimed to determine which policies had positive economic effects (and which did not) so that they might be replicated across the country, a process Deng Xiaoping famously referred to as “crossing the river by touching the stones.” 9
China’s Economic Growth and Reforms: 1979-the Present
China’s economy has developed significantly quicker since economic reforms were implemented, and the country has avoided serious economic upheavals for the most part. 10 China’s annual real GDP averaged 9.5 percent from 1979 to 2018. (see Figure 3). As a result, China’s economy has been able to double in size in real terms every eight years on average. The worldwide economic slowdown that began in 2008 had a major influence on China’s economy. Early in 2009, Chinese media stated that 20 million migrant workers had returned home after losing their jobs due to the financial crisis, and that real GDP growth in the fourth quarter of 2008 had slowed to 6.8% year-on-year. The Chinese government responded by enacting a $586 billion stimulus program geared primarily at supporting infrastructure and relaxing monetary policy to boost bank lending. 11 As a result of these efforts, China was able to mitigate the consequences of a dramatic drop in worldwide demand for Chinese goods. China’s real GDP growth averaged 9.7% from 2008 to 2010. However, throughout the next six years, the rate of GDP growth fell, falling from 10.6 percent in 2010 to 6.7 percent in 2016. In 2017, real GDP increased to 6.8%, but fell to 6.6 percent in 2018. (although it rose to 6.8 percent in 2017). China’s real GDP growth will decelerate each year over the following six years, according to the IMF’s April 2019 World Economic Outlook, falling to 5.5 percent in 2024. (Figure 4). 12 Many analysts warn that if the US and China continue to apply punitive economic measures against each other, such as tariff rises resulting from US Section 301 action and Chinese retaliation, China’s economic development may decelerate even further. Increased tariffs on all trade between the US and China, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), could cut China’s real GDP by 1.1 percent in 2021-2022, compared to the OECD’s baseline economic predictions. 13
Figure 4: China’s Real Annual GDP Growth from 2007 to 2018, with Forecasts through 2024
Causes of China’s Economic Growth
Much of China’s quick economic growth is attributed to two key factors: large-scale capital investment (funded by substantial domestic savings and foreign investment) and rapid productivity growth, according to economists. These two elements appear to have worked in concert. Economic changes strengthened the economy’s efficiency, resulting in more output and more resources for new investment.
China has a long history of having a high savings rate. Domestic savings as a percentage of GDP was at 32 percent when reforms began in 1979. During this time, however, the majority of Chinese savings were generated through SOE earnings, which were utilised by the central government for domestic investment. Economic reforms, which included decentralization of economic output, resulted in significant increases in both family and business savings in China. As a result, China has the largest gross savings as a proportion of GDP among major economies. China has been able to support a high level of investment due to its substantial domestic savings. In fact, China’s gross domestic savings greatly outnumber its domestic investment, making it a significant net worldwide lender.
Productivity gains (i.e., advances in efficiency) have been identified as another important element in China’s rapid economic growth by a number of experts. Productivity gains were mostly due to a reallocation of resources to more productive uses, particularly in industries like agriculture, trade, and services that were formerly tightly regulated by the government. Agricultural reforms, for example, increased output, allowing employees to pursue jobs in the more productive manufacturing sector. Non-state companies (such as private corporations) arose as a result of China’s economic decentralization, which tended to pursue more productive activities than centrally controlled SOEs and were more market-oriented and efficient. Furthermore, a larger portion of the economy (mostly the export sector) was subjected to competitive dynamics. Local and provincial governments were given unrestricted authority to form and operate businesses without intervention from the federal government. FDI also introduced new technology and procedures to China, which increased efficiency.
However, as China’s technological development converges with that of major developed countries (i.e., through the adoption of foreign technology), productivity gains and, as a result, real GDP growth may slow significantly, unless China becomes a major center for new technology and innovation and/or implements new comprehensive economic reforms. Several developing economies (most notably in Asia and Latin America) experienced rapid economic development and growth in the 1960s and 1970s by implementing some of the same policies that China has used to develop its economy to date, such as measures to boost exports and promote and protect specific industries. However, at some point throughout their development, some of these countries began to face protracted economic stagnation (or substantially slower growth than prior levels), a situation known as the “middle-income trap” by economists. 14 This means that while several developing (low-income) economies were able to transition to a middle-income economy, they were unable to transition to a high-income economy due to their inability to sustain high levels of productivity gains (in part due to their inability to address structural inefficiencies in the economy). 15 China may be at a comparable fork in the road right now. The World Bank uses a per capita gross national income (GNI) approach to classify economic development levels. 16 According to the World Bank, China transitioned from a low-income to a low-middle-income economy in 1997, and then to an upper-middle-income country in 2010. China’s per capita GNI in 2017 was $8,690, which was 38.7% below the amount required to become a high-income economy. According to the Chinese government, China will be able to cross the high-income level by 2025. It intends to accomplish this, in part, by making innovation a key source of future economic growth. Skeptics argue that China’s innovative development will be difficult to achieve, particularly if it is primarily state-driven and imposes new limitations on foreign companies.
Notes: The red bar represents the level at which China would need to achieve in order to become a high-income economy.
According to the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), China’s real GDP growth will drop significantly over the next several decades, eventually catching up to US growth rates by 2037. (U.S. and Chinese real GDP growth rates are both projected at 1.9 percent ). For a few years after that, the EIU expects US GDP growth to outpace China’s (Figure 6). 17
Figure 6: Annual Real GDP Growth Rates in the United States and China from 2010 to 2018 and Projections to 2050
The Chinese government has expressed a desire to shift away from its existing economic model of “rapid growth at any cost” to more “smart” growth, which aims to minimize reliance on energy-intensive and high-polluting industries in favor of high technology, renewable energy, and services. China has also stated that it wishes to achieve more balanced economic growth. (These topics are covered in greater depth later in the report.)
In 2021, what would India’s GDP be?
In its second advance estimates of national accounts released on Monday, the National Statistical Office (NSO) forecasted the country’s growth for 2021-22 at 8.9%, slightly lower than the 9.2% estimated in its first advance estimates released in January.
Furthermore, the National Statistics Office (NSO) reduced its estimates of GDP contraction for the coronavirus pandemic-affected last fiscal year (2020-21) to 6.6 percent. The previous projection was for a 7.3% decrease.
In April-June 2020, the Indian economy contracted 23.8 percent, and in July-September 2020, it contracted 6.6 percent.
“While an adverse base was expected to flatten growth in Q3 FY2022, the NSO’s initial estimates are far below our expectations (6.2 percent for GDP), with a marginal increase in manufacturing and a contraction in construction that is surprising given the heavy rains in the southern states,” said Aditi Nayar, Chief Economist at ICRA.
“GDP at constant (2011-12) prices is estimated at Rs 38.22 trillion in Q3 of 2021-22, up from Rs 36.26 trillion in Q3 of 2020-21, indicating an increase of 5.4 percent,” according to an official release.
According to the announcement, real GDP (GDP) or Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at constant (2011-12) prices is expected to reach Rs 147.72 trillion in 2021-22, up from Rs 135.58 trillion in the first updated estimate announced on January 31, 2022.
GDP growth is expected to be 8.9% in 2021-22, compared to a decline of 6.6 percent in 2020-21.
In terms of value, GDP in October-December 2021-22 was Rs 38,22,159 crore, up from Rs 36,22,220 crore in the same period of 2020-21.
According to NSO data, the manufacturing sector’s Gross Value Added (GVA) growth remained nearly steady at 0.2 percent in the third quarter of 2021-22, compared to 8.4 percent a year ago.
GVA growth in the farm sector was weak in the third quarter, at 2.6 percent, compared to 4.1 percent a year before.
GVA in the construction sector decreased by 2.8%, compared to 6.6% rise a year ago.
The electricity, gas, water supply, and other utility services segment grew by 3.7 percent in the third quarter of current fiscal year, compared to 1.5 percent growth the previous year.
Similarly, trade, hotel, transportation, communication, and broadcasting services expanded by 6.1 percent, compared to a decline of 10.1 percent a year ago.
In Q3 FY22, financial, real estate, and professional services growth was 4.6 percent, compared to 10.3 percent in Q3 FY21.
During the quarter under examination, public administration, defense, and other services expanded by 16.8%, compared to a decrease of 2.9 percent a year earlier.
Meanwhile, China’s economy grew by 4% between October and December of 2021.
“India’s GDP growth for Q3FY22 was a touch lower than our forecast of 5.7 percent, as the manufacturing sector grew slowly and the construction industry experienced unanticipated de-growth.” We have, however, decisively emerged from the pandemic recession, with all sectors of the economy showing signs of recovery.
“Going ahead, unlock trade will help growth in Q4FY22, as most governments have eliminated pandemic-related limitations, but weak rural demand and geopolitical shock from the Russia-Ukraine conflict may impair global growth and supply chains.” The impending pass-through of higher oil and gas costs could affect domestic demand mood, according to Elara Capital economist Garima Kapoor.
“Strong growth in the services sector and a pick-up in private final consumption expenditure drove India’s real GDP growth to 5.4 percent in Q3.” While agriculture’s growth slowed in Q3, the construction sector’s growth became negative.
“On the plus side, actual expenditure levels in both the private and public sectors are greater than they were before the pandemic.
“Given the encouraging trends in government revenues and spending until January 2022, as well as the upward revision in the nominal GDP growth rate for FY22, the fiscal deficit to GDP ratio for FY22 may come out better than what the (federal) budget projected,” said Rupa Rege Nitsure, group chief economist, L&T Financial Holdings.
“The growth number is pretty disappointing,” Sujan Hajra, chief economist of Mumbai-based Anand Rathi Securities, said, citing weaker rural consumer demand and investments as reasons.
After crude prices soared beyond $100 a barrel, India, which imports virtually all of its oil, might face a wider trade imbalance, a weaker rupee, and greater inflation, with a knock to GDP considered as the main concern.
“We believe the fiscal and monetary policy accommodation will remain, given the geopolitical volatility and crude oil prices,” Hajra added.
According to Nomura, a 10% increase in oil prices would shave 0.2 percentage points off India’s GDP growth while adding 0.3 to 0.4 percentage points to retail inflation.
Widening sanctions against Russia are likely to have a ripple impact on India, according to Sakshi Gupta, senior economist at HDFC Bank.
“We see a 20-30 basis point downside risk to our base predictions,” she said. For the time being, HDFC expects the GDP to rise 8.2% in the coming fiscal year.
What kind of economy does India have?
The government concentrated on growing its heavy industry sector, but this strategy proved to be unsustainable. India began to remove its economic constraints in 1991, and the country’s private sector grew as a result of the increasing liberalization. India is now classified as a mixed economy, with both the private and public sectors coexisting, and the country relying heavily on international trade.
In 2021, which country will have the greatest GDP?
What are the world’s largest economies? According to the International Monetary Fund, the following countries have the greatest nominal GDP in the world:
In India, how is GDP calculated?
- The GDP of India is estimated using two methods: one based on economic activity (at factor cost) and the other based on expenditure (at market prices).
- The performance of eight distinct industries is evaluated using the factor cost technique.
- The expenditure-based method shows how different aspects of the economy, such as trade, investments, and personal consumption, are performing.
What is a GDP example?
The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a metric that measures the worth of a country’s economic activities. GDP is the sum of the market values, or prices, of all final goods and services produced in an economy during a given time period. Within this seemingly basic concept, however, there are three key distinctions:
- GDP is a metric that measures the value of a country’s output in local currency.
- GDP attempts to capture all final commodities and services generated within a country, ensuring that the final monetary value of everything produced in that country is represented in the GDP.
- GDP is determined over a set time period, usually a year or quarter of a year.
Computing GDP
Let’s look at how to calculate GDP now that we know what it is. GDP is the monetary value of all the goods and services generated in an economy, as we all know. Consider Country B, which exclusively produces bananas and backrubs. In the first year, they produce 5 bananas for $1 each and 5 backrubs worth $6 each. This year’s GDP is (quantity of bananas X price of bananas) + (quantity of backrubs X price of backrubs), or (5 X $1) + (5 X $6) = $35 for the country. The equation grows longer as more commodities and services are created. For every good and service produced within the country, GDP = (quantity of A X price of A) + (quantity of B X price of B) + (quantity of whatever X price of whatever).
To compute GDP in the real world, the market values of many products and services must be calculated.
While GDP’s total output is essential, the breakdown of that output into the economy’s big structures is often just as important.
In general, macroeconomists utilize a set of categories to break down an economy into its key components; in this case, GDP is equal to the total of consumer spending, investment, government purchases, and net exports, as represented by the equation:
- The sum of household expenditures on durable commodities, nondurable items, and services is known as consumer spending, or C. Clothing, food, and health care are just a few examples.
- The sum of spending on capital equipment, inventories, and structures is referred to as investment (I).
- Machinery, unsold items, and homes are just a few examples.
- G stands for government spending, which is the total amount of money spent on products and services by all government agencies.
- Naval ships and government employee wages are two examples.
- Net exports, or NX, is the difference between foreigners’ spending on local goods and domestic residents’ expenditure on foreign goods.
- Net exports, to put it another way, is the difference between exports and imports.
GDP vs. GNP
GDP is just one technique to measure an economy’s overall output. Another technique is to calculate the Gross National Product, or GNP. As previously stated, GDP is the total value of all products and services generated in a country. GNP narrows the definition slightly: it is the total value of all goods and services generated by permanent residents of a country, regardless of where they are located. The important distinction between GDP and GNP is based on how production is counted by foreigners in a country vs nationals outside of that country. Output by foreigners within a country is counted in the GDP of that country, whereas production by nationals outside of that country is not. Production by foreigners within a country is not considered for GNP, while production by nationals from outside the country is. GNP, on the other hand, is the value of goods and services produced by citizens of a country, whereas GDP is the value of goods and services produced by a country’s citizens.
For example, in Country B (shown in ), nationals produce bananas while foreigners produce backrubs.
Figure 1 shows that Country B’s GDP in year one is (5 X $1) + (5 X $6) = $35.
Because the $30 from backrubs is added to the GNP of the immigrants’ home country, the GNP of country B is (5 X $1) = $5.
The distinction between GDP and GNP is theoretically significant, although it is rarely relevant in practice.
GDP and GNP are usually quite close together because the majority of production within a country is done by its own citizens.
Macroeconomists use GDP as a measure of a country’s total output in general.
Growth Rate of GDP
GDP is a great way to compare the economy at two different times in time. This comparison can then be used to calculate a country’s overall output growth rate.
Subtract 1 from the amount obtained by dividing the GDP for the first year by the GDP for the second year to arrive at the GDP growth rate.
This technique of calculating total output growth has an obvious flaw: both increases in the price of products produced and increases in the quantity of goods produced result in increases in GDP.
As a result, determining whether the volume of output is changing or the price of output is changing from the GDP growth rate is challenging.
Because of this constraint, an increase in GDP does not always suggest that an economy is increasing.
For example, if Country B produced 5 bananas value $1 each and 5 backrubs of $6 each in a year, the GDP would be $35.
If the price of bananas rises to $2 next year and the quantity produced remains constant, Country B’s GDP will be $40.
While the market value of Country B’s goods and services increased, the quantity of goods and services produced remained unchanged.
Because fluctuations in GDP are not always related to economic growth, this factor can make comparing GDP from one year to the next problematic.
Real GDP vs. Nominal GDP
Macroeconomists devised two types of GDP, nominal GDP and real GDP, to deal with the uncertainty inherent in GDP growth rates.
- The total worth of all produced goods and services at current prices is known as nominal GDP. This is the GDP that was discussed in the previous parts. When comparing sheer output with time rather than the value of output, nominal GDP is more informative than real GDP.
- The total worth of all produced goods and services at constant prices is known as real GDP.
- The prices used to calculate real GDP are derived from a certain base year.
- It is possible to compare economic growth from one year to the next in terms of production of goods and services rather than the market value of these products and services by leaving prices constant in the computation of real GDP.
- In this way, real GDP removes the effects of price fluctuations from year-to-year output comparisons.
Choosing a base year is the first step in computing real GDP. Use the GDP equation with year 3 numbers and year 1 prices to calculate real GDP in year 3 using year 1 as the base year. Real GDP equals (10 X $1) + (9 X $6) = $64 in this situation. The nominal GDP in year three is (10 X $2) + (9 X $6) = $74 in comparison. Because the price of bananas climbed from year one to year three, nominal GDP grew faster than actual GDP during this period.
GDP Deflator
Nominal GDP and real GDP convey various aspects of the shift when comparing GDP between years. Nominal GDP takes into account both quantity and price changes. Real GDP, on the other hand, just measures changes in quantity and is unaffected by price fluctuations. Because of this distinction, a third relevant statistic can be calculated once nominal and real GDP have been computed. The GDP deflator is the nominal GDP to real GDP ratio minus one for a particular year. The GDP deflator, in effect, shows how much of the change in GDP from a base year is due to changes in the price level.
Let’s say we want to calculate the GDP deflator for Country B in year 3 using as the base year.
To calculate the GDP deflator, we must first calculate both nominal and real GDP in year 3.
By rearranging the elements in the GDP deflator equation, nominal GDP may be calculated by multiplying real GDP and the GDP deflator.
This equation displays the distinct information provided by each of these output measures.
Changes in quantity are captured by real GDP.
Changes in the price level are captured by the GDP deflator.
Nominal GDP takes into account both price and quantity changes.
You can break down a change in GDP into its component changes in price level and change in quantities produced using nominal GDP, real GDP, and the GDP deflator.
GDP Per Capita
When describing the size and growth of a country’s economy, GDP is the single most helpful number. However, it’s crucial to think about how GDP relates to living standards. After all, a country’s economy is less essential to its residents than the level of living it delivers.
GDP per capita, calculated by dividing GDP by the population size, represents the average amount of GDP received by each individual, and hence serves as an excellent indicator of an economy’s level of life.
The value of GDP per capita is the income of a representative individual because GDP equals national income.
This figure is directly proportional to one’s standard of living.
In general, the higher a country’s GDP per capita, the higher its level of living.
Because of the differences in population between countries, GDP per capita is a more relevant indicator for measuring level of living than GDP.
If a country has a high GDP but a large population, each citizen may have a low income and so live in deplorable circumstances.
A country, on the other hand, may have a moderate GDP but a small population, resulting in a high individual income.
By comparing standard of living among countries using GDP per capita, the problem of GDP division among a country’s residents is avoided.
What is the complete form of GDP?
The total monetary or market worth of all finished goods and services produced inside a country’s borders in a certain time period is known as GDP. It serves as a comprehensive scorecard of a country’s economic health because it is a wide measure of entire domestic production.
Is China a developing nation?
GDP growth has averaged about 10% per year since 1978, when China began to open up and reform its economy, and more than 800 million people have been pulled out of poverty. Over the same time span, there have been tremendous gains in access to health, education, and other services.
China has risen to the status of an upper-middle-income country.
Going forward, it will be critical that poverty alleviation initiatives progressively focus on the vulnerabilities faced by the significant number of individuals still considered poor by middle-income country criteria, including those residing in cities.
China’s rapid growth, which has been fueled by resource-intensive manufacturing, exports, and low-wage labor, has mostly reached its limitations, resulting in economic, social, and environmental imbalances. To address these inequities, the economy’s structure must transition from low-end manufacturing to higher-end manufacturing and services, as well as from investment to consumption.
In the face of structural restrictions such as decreased labor force growth, reduced returns on investment, and slowing productivity, growth has slowed in recent years. The task now is to discover new growth drivers while also dealing with the social and environmental consequences of China’s prior development path.
China’s rapid economic expansion has outpaced institutional development, and there are significant institutional and reform gaps that must be addressed in order for China to maintain a high-quality and long-term growth path. To further support the market system, the state’s role must evolve and focus on delivering stable market expectations and a clear and fair business climate, as well as strengthening the regulatory system and the rule of law.
Because of its size, China is at the center of major regional and global development challenges. China is the world’s greatest emitter of greenhouse gases, with per capita emissions currently surpassing those of the European Union, although being slightly lower than the OECD average and far lower than the United States, and its air and water pollution has an impact on neighboring countries. Without China’s participation, global environmental issues will remain unsolvable. Furthermore, maintaining adequate economic growth has substantial spillover effects on the rest of the international economy.
Many of China’s difficult development challenges, such as transitioning to a new growth model, increasing aging, developing a cost-effective health system, and promoting a lower-carbon energy route, are applicable to other countries. Through trade, investment, and ideas, China is exerting a rising effect on other developing countries.
Following 2.3 percent real GDP growth in 2020, China’s economy is expected to increase by 8.5 percent in 2021, mainly to base effects. The pace of growth is decreasing, owing to the lingering effects of policy and macroprudential tightening, as well as floods and the latest Delta epidemic. Although lingering stricter restrictions and cautious sentiment as a result of the recent Delta outbreaks would weigh on consumption recovery, their impact is projected to be mainly compensated in the second half of the year by robust foreign demand and moderate policy support. The near-term risks have shifted to the downside, with the main concern being recurrent outbreaks caused by more transmissible COVID-19 mutations, which might cause major economic upheaval. Given unfavourable demographics, sluggish productivity growth, and the legacies of excessive borrowing and pollution, China’s economy faces structural challenges in the medium term. Short-term macroeconomic policies and structural reforms aiming at reinvigorating the shift to more balanced, high-quality growth are needed to address these difficulties.
The administration recently emphasized promoting common prosperity as a fundamental economic goal, indicating a likely shift in policy objectives toward addressing income disparity. Over the medium run, policies aimed at reducing high inequality through more equitable taxes and a reinforced social security system will result in long-term poverty reduction, a greater middle class, and increased private consumption as an economic driver.